Here's a weird Granny playing GTA because it "keeps her mentally active"
82 replies, posted
Quite a number of females plays MMOs.
verynicelady, you're awesome
Well,if female gamers are going to outnumber men,they better not count facebook and iphone games
[QUOTE=shrinkme;39373652]How weird would it be to be browsing fp at 80 years old? Chatting with all your facepunch buddies for some 60 years of your life. Going through a lifetime's worth of events with people you've never even seen before yet have a weird kind of connection to.
And when you die your account is perma'd and the name is posted in a thread with a list of dead users called "Farewell" or some shit.
I mean the forums probably won't last that long, but it's cool to think about.[/QUOTE]
Oh god you mean I'm not getting rid of you guys even when I'm 80?
[QUOTE=Demolitions2;39373501]Outnumber male gamers? I highly doubt that.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21039062[/url]
This was related to the article.
I was more surprised that she was playing Disgaea. It's just one of those game's i couldn't imagine a old granny would be playing at all. And here we are.
The world is a strange place, isn't it?
[QUOTE=buro;39377402]Mini-games are games you can quickly get into. Angry birds is a mini game because you can just choose a level and play it. The levels are short and can be finished in a minute. These games are most often played to pass the time. When waiting for a bus for example. The distinction needs to be made because both playerbases are different. A "gamer" probably plays mini games as well but a "mini gamer" may not.[/QUOTE]
why does that matter and no mini game is absolutely worthless in that context because it means super mario, warioware, gta, all become mini games.
and every game is played to pass time unless you're a professional gamer.
[QUOTE=Faren;39376426]because we're talking about who we'd define as a 'gamer'
it's analogous to someone who plays basketball in a league vs. someone who occasionally shoots a few hoops with friends
they're both playing basketball, sure, but they're not both basketballers
calling people who play a couple of mini-games on their phones 'gamers' is missing the point imo[/QUOTE]
I would consider a person a gamer if
1.) They spend a large amount of time actually playing games, it should be their main hobby or at least one of their main hobbies
2.) They are interested in the actual evolution of gaming, they don't simply play a random game to pass time, they take interest in developers, news and anything that matters to games.
3.) They actually consider themselves gamers(There can ofcourse be cases where a person does not consider themselves a gamer but still should, or the other way around). But in general if you consider yourself a gamer you probably are one.
Playing angry birds every once in a while doesn't make you a gamer, in the same way that taking snaps of your mates on your phone doesn't make you a photographer
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39376880]how fucking elitist do you have to be to compare yourself to an nba athlete?
and this isn't even a good analogy anyways because there actually [I]are[/I] professional gaming leagues.
[editline]27th January 2013[/editline]
and what separates a "game" from a "mini-game"? i always thought a mini-game was a game within a game(i.e. warioware, playing poker in rdr).
and why does this distinction need to be made? so you can feel smug about how you play cod or w/e on xbox while someone else enjoys their little mobile phone games?[/QUOTE]
are you intentionally misreading what I'm saying
I didn't say "NBA", I said "basketball league". As in the kind of thing a 12 year old kid plays. Learn to actually read the content of someone's post instead of making assumptions.
and the distinction should be made because we're talking statistics. I don't give a fuck what people do in their free time or what they find fun. But for the purpose of this argument we're talking about statistics gathered on demographics of gamers, aren't we? Seems to me that if you include people who play Angry Birds or Temple Run on their phone then you're competely missing the point of gathering statistics on gamers, because you're not measuring demographics of the actual hobbyists (the people who take a deeper interest in the games and that should be called 'gamers', imo), you're polluting your data with people that just play 15 minutes of Fruit Ninja while they're on the train. Again, not saying this out of elitism, just out of rationality, because I don't see how you can miss the difference between someone who has invested time and money into a hobby and someone who downloaded a free game to play while they commute.
[QUOTE=jiggu;39383448]I would consider a person a gamer if
1.) They spend a large amount of time actually playing games, it should be their main hobby or at least one of their main hobbies
2.) They are interested in the actual evolution of gaming, they don't simply play a random game to pass time, they take interest in developers, news and anything that matters to games.
3.) They actually consider themselves gamers(There can ofcourse be cases where a person does not consider themselves a gamer but still should, or the other way around). But in general if you consider yourself a gamer you probably are one.[/QUOTE]
so you essentially raise the bar so high that most people who play games are not gamers.
that makes no sense.
[QUOTE=Faren;39383673]are you intentionally misreading what I'm saying
I didn't say "NBA", I said "basketball league". As in the kind of thing a 12 year old kid plays. Learn to actually read the content of someone's post instead of making assumptions.
and the distinction should be made because we're talking statistics. I don't give a fuck what people do in their free time or what they find fun. But for the purpose of this argument we're talking about statistics gathered on demographics of gamers, aren't we? Seems to me that if you include people who play Angry Birds or Temple Run on their phone then you're competely missing the point of gathering statistics on gamers, because you're not measuring demographics of the actual hobbyists (the people who take a deeper interest in the games and that should be called 'gamers', imo), you're polluting your data with people that just play 15 minutes of Fruit Ninja while they're on the train. Again, not saying this out of elitism, just out of rationality, because I don't see how you can miss the difference between someone who has invested time and money into a hobby and someone who downloaded a free game to play while they commute.[/QUOTE]
i think if you exclude those people are are completely fucking up the demographics as well.
you are essentially saying "you don't play games i consider games therefore you aren't in my group." it's pretentious and elitist as fuck. these are statistics regarding gamers(people who play games), so gamers are included even if you don't think they are true gamers.
[editline]28th January 2013[/editline]
you are trying to use gamer as a term that excludes people. you aren't using it to look at who plays games, only who plays the games you want to play and who is as dedicated to the industry as you think they should be.
it's akin to saying that someone who plays basketball with friends isn't really playing basketball because they don't do it with the frequency or dedication a professional does.
Anyone ever think of how our children's children will find our posts on FP or other forums? Those will be some fun conversations.
[QUOTE=Creid;39384571]Anyone ever think of how our children's children will find our posts on FP or other forums? Those will be some fun conversations.[/QUOTE]
"granpappy, why are there hitler manatees on your posts"
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39384374]you are trying to use gamer as a term that excludes people. you aren't using it to look at who plays games, [B]only who plays the games you want to play[/B] and who is as dedicated to the industry as you think they should be.[/QUOTE]
that's not even true, there are plenty of games that I find completely uninteresting/unfun that I'd still acknowledge have a dedicated playerbase comprised of what I'd call 'gamers' (e.g. WoW, LoL, Starcraft)
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39384374]it's akin to saying that someone who plays basketball with friends isn't really playing basketball because they don't do it with the frequency or dedication a professional does.[/QUOTE]
except I didn't say that they're not playing basketball, I said that they're not 'basketballers' because they don't really take more than a casual interest in it
how many times do I have to say this? I honestly, 100%, do not give a single flying fuck how someone passes their time or what games they play. My argument isn't based on elitism, it's based on pedantry.
[editline]28th January 2013[/editline]
by the way I'm not denying that mobile games are games, that's not where my issue is
[editline]28th January 2013[/editline]
my issue is that I think defining anyone who simply touches any sort of game once in a while as a gamer, kind of means you require another word for what you'd call people who are more enthusiastic about it
[editline]28th January 2013[/editline]
maybe we do need another word, seeing as the definition of a 'game' is changing so much, guess it's inevitable that 'gamer' would be changing with it and maybe I'm just clinging onto old definitions
[editline]28th January 2013[/editline]
and just for the record mate:
[QUOTE=Faren;39376426]they're both playing basketball, sure, but they're not both basketballers[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39384374]it's akin to saying that someone who plays basketball with friends isn't really playing basketball because they don't do it with the frequency or dedication a professional does.[/QUOTE]
the word gamer has always meant someone who plays games.
if i play angry birds on the bus to work every morning, i am still gaming. just because someone doesn't play for hours a day doesn't mean it's not a hobby.
if i play guitar for 20 minutes a day am i less of a guitarist than someone who plays for an hour? does proficiency or dedication somehow diminish the fact that playing guitar is my hobby?
[QUOTE=dgg;39377762]Where the fuck do you live where you can live on food for 60$ a month?
How poor is your country?[/QUOTE]
I live in Central California.
It's nowhere near optimal, I'm just poor and starving.
[QUOTE=RobbL;39383613]Playing angry birds every once in a while doesn't make you a gamer, in the same way that taking snaps of your mates on your phone doesn't make you a photographer[/QUOTE]
playing video games isn't an art form you schmuck
look at that monster
i bet she's just thinking of shooting cops
horrible
Oh boy, quite alot of entitled litte shits in this thread.
Could you try to lay off this crusade of dressing your favorite passtime up as something people need to be accepted into, and strive to achieve?
Take a look at this deduction:
[B]gaming - game - play - fun [/B]
If you dont play to have fun, you missed the point. It doesnt take rigorous repetition and perfection of technique to listen to a story. And you dont get to monopolize an entire branch of media for 'Your Group', because you think the general public will defile it.
Tl:dr grow the fuck up, dont turn; having fun, into something you fight over.
I think yawmwen is right. The word 'gamer' is very generalized and applies to everyone, but that's not to say it's not misleading.
My ex-gf classed herself as a PC gamer, yet the majority of games she plays are facebook games.
I mean, technically yeah, she's gaming on a pc, but when you say "PC Gamer", i'm not thinking of facebook games, I'm thinking of Steam and the PC gaming culture.
It's similar when you call someone a gamer. You're thinking of the gaming culture, which probably isn't casual iphone games.
[QUOTE=TheHydra;39385769]playing video games isn't an art form you schmuck[/QUOTE]
The analogy still stands
Being a gamer is playing video games as a hobby
[QUOTE=RobbL;39388977]The analogy still stands
Being a gamer is playing video games as a hobby[/QUOTE]
ok and how do you define a hobby? where are the lines drawn
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.